Reviewer Ethics

Reviewers play a crucial role in safeguarding the quality and credibility of academic journals. The process of manuscript evaluation is not merely a decision-making task regarding publication; rather, it is a scholarly responsibility that requires integrity, professionalism, and accountability. Reviewers are expected to assess manuscripts solely on their academic merit, free from personal bias, institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, or theoretical orientation. All judgments should be grounded in scholarly reasoning and evidence.

Throughout the review process, reviewers must strictly maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts. The content, ideas, data, and findings contained in a manuscript must not be disclosed to any third party, nor used for personal benefit prior to publication. Since the manuscript remains the intellectual property of the author until publication, respecting authors’ intellectual ownership is a fundamental ethical obligation.

If a reviewer recognizes any potential conflict of interest—whether personal, academic, collaborative, or financial—that could compromise impartiality, the reviewer should promptly inform the editor and decline the review. Transparency in this regard is essential to preserving the integrity of the peer review process. Reviewers are also expected to fulfill their responsibilities in a timely manner by responding promptly to review invitations and submitting evaluations within the designated timeframe.

Constructive feedback is a core component of ethical reviewing. Comments should be clear, reasoned, respectful, and aimed at improving the quality of the manuscript rather than criticizing the author personally. Reviewers should provide academic justification for their recommendations and identify any methodological weaknesses, citation inaccuracies, or potential instances of plagiarism. If ethical concerns arise, these should be reported directly to the editor.